For our first reading
assignment, I was mildly shocked by the opposing nature of the two articles,
and since I was in the process of absorbing so much classroom information, I
completely missed the fact that this was done on purpose. J
In my opinion, both articles
were quite interesting reads, but the Crowley article was much more difficult
to understand. I couldn't help but think that maybe I should have been an
English major. The vocabulary was quite
challenging; in fact, I Googled a few vocabulary words so that I could
understand it. This article was definitely ‘high octane’ reading and
it is clear that I will have to re-read it to grasp its full meaning. Despite
the challenges, the section on Available Proofs was a detailed overview of how
good writers formulate strong arguments. I am convinced that students of
law must study rhetoric as a means to courtroom survival.
The Lindemann article was
quite relaxing and enjoyable, and gave me a reprieve from Crowley. It gave an
awesome review of the things that writing teachers can do to make writing more
pleasurable and understandable for students. I found it pleasurable to
review the free writing, brainstorming, and mind mapping techniques. The
heuristics was something very new to me, which opened the possibilities for
use in future writing classes.
As a whole, the authors did a great job of discussing invention.
Crowley’s discussion was much more intense and in depth, though. This piece was definitely for an upper-level
college student who had covered the basics of the trade. I especially liked the astronomy example and
how Crowley laid out exactly what heuristics would look like in this
situation. The example was most helpful
in that it provided a framework for me to follow.
Lindemann’s example of
heuristics on page 118 was very thorough as well, but not all questions may be
related to a given topic. In this case,
the student must pick and choose which questions would be most valid to his or
her topic. Overall, I found that both
articles had the capability to produce probing, detailed thoughts within a
reader’s mind.
Given what you wrote, Pam, I think you'd be interested to know that rhetoric and legal institutions developed hand-in-hand for many centuries in the beginning times of both: You are absolutely right that an interest in different kinds of proofs is important to lawyers.... but I also can't help but think that in this time of TV news talk shows and heavy political back-and-forth that ALL of us could use some sense of what kinds of proof and support are better than others!
ReplyDeleteYou describe well the differences between Lindemann and Crowley: as we talked about in class, Lindemann's book is aimed at people who intend to teach writing to high school and first-year college students, whereas Crowley's book is aimed at upper level undergraduates focused on writing or rhetorical studies. I hope you can see, though, that they are both discussing very similar approaches, just for different audiences and with slightly different purposes.
I hope that what is offered in the two writings on invention does prove useful to you, both in your own writing and in your professional work.